User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:08:03 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Here's a question for you--what process did Trump go through to secure his Q clearance? Being elected President. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:08:03 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Okay, so we agree that any security clearance is derived from his position as president. Now why would that (automatically) follow him out of the office? If the only process he went through to gain his clearance was getting elected president, then he would lose it once he is no longer president, correct? So you acknowledge that POTUS is the senior OCA and all classification authorities stem from the office? Guess what that the second part of that authority is, he can declassify at will, and is not bound by the same processes of other Governmental Employees. Meaning an order from him saying materials brought to his residence are declassified is valid under a doctrine called VOCO, Verbal Order of the Commander-in-Chief. |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:18:27 PM EDT
[Last Edit: M4-AK]
[#3]
 UNSEALED: Scummy Prosecutor THREATENED Defense; Judge SAVES Stormy Daniels; Fani's BOTCHED Charges Live now on Youtube Now over. This unredaction segment will be available in short form tomorrow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:19:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AKSnowRider]
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: I'm no expert but my understanding is any access to classified information is at the discretion of the current President, and Biden made it clear immediately after he entered the office that he considered Trump a security risk and would not be giving him access to anything classified. I don't think it's considered a blanket security clearance like with any government employee. You are wrong..period.....They broke the law in order to get and carry out the subpoena... everything they did was criminal....Straight from the US court of appeals...  Attached Filehttps://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/B8BAD4AB171DABF285258AA6005D0173/  Attached File Attached File |
|
|
|
NE, USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:21:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JAR0023: Teflon Don is a reference to John Gotti. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JAR0023: Originally Posted By MacManus: I love how all the "principled_conservatives" forget that Trump's nickname in the 80's/90's was Teflon Don. yeah, he may be a loud mouthed asshole but he is a fucking expert at stepping right up to the line and leaning way over it, so his enemies can shoot themselves in the dick trying to "get him" for it. Teflon Don is a reference to John Gotti. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:29:28 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By R0N: So you acknowledge that POTUS is the senior OCA and all classification authorities stem from the office? Guess what that the second part of that authority is, he can declassify at will, and is not bound by the same processes of other Governmental Employees. Meaning an order from him saying materials brought to his residence are declassified is valid under a doctrine called VOCO, Verbal Order of the Commander-in-Chief. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By R0N: Originally Posted By CMiller: Okay, so we agree that any security clearance is derived from his position as president. Now why would that (automatically) follow him out of the office? If the only process he went through to gain his clearance was getting elected president, then he would lose it once he is no longer president, correct? So you acknowledge that POTUS is the senior OCA and all classification authorities stem from the office? Guess what that the second part of that authority is, he can declassify at will, and is not bound by the same processes of other Governmental Employees. Meaning an order from him saying materials brought to his residence are declassified is valid under a doctrine called VOCO, Verbal Order of the Commander-in-Chief. Lol we already what round and round on this for 20 pages in another thread, I'm not going to bother getting back into it. I'll just say that a federal appeals panel already rejected the concept and didn't even consider it worthy of discussion. But for what it's worth I'm not aware of any claim that he ever even made a verbal order regarding this question. He's never even claimed himself that it happened, much less found anybody willing to testify to it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:31:26 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Consigli: Criticism of the government gets an account warning now? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Consigli: Originally Posted By dlshady: Originally Posted By FreefallRet: So what does this mean? Can someone break this down? I'm gonna go with: It means more shit we already knew has been proven, and nobody will do a fucking thing about it. I'll refrain from commenting any further because the last time I voiced my opinion of crooked government officials, I got another account warning. Criticism of the government gets an account warning now? Arfcom is worried about what woke people might think. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:31:29 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: That's not the point. The point is the Jack Smith's Indictment in the documents case is all false and your precious  piles of evidence is gone once the redactions were removed by Judge Canon.Here's a fun fact: In a DOE memo, redacted by Jack Smith's team, confirmed that The President maintained his Q Clearance for holding documents under their purview. Take the loss, go sit in the corner and STFU. So I just finished skimming all 315 pages, and didn’t find a single thing even remotely related to the thread title about the WH manufacturing anything. Perhaps you can point me to some of the specific pages? I did find the DOE memo you might have been referencing. Care to read aloud the first paragraph for the class? 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:31:38 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By wvfarrier: Of course, anyone who makes a stink about it will become the next lawfare victim the Committee of Public Safety is looking out for you (the public 'you', not the private 'you', mostly) |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:36:07 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sixnine: Do you know what discovery is? Do you understand they have a duty to turn over all evidence that may be exculpatory? I mean by the letter of the law, yes. But federal prosecutors are very much used to not doing that and paying no penalty. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:36:21 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AKSnowRider: You are wrong..period.....They broke the law in order to get and carry out the subpoena... everything they did was criminal....Straight from the US court of appeals... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/404934/Screenshot_2024-04-24_at_7_59_10_AM_png-3196992.JPG https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/B8BAD4AB171DABF285258AA6005D0173/ https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/404934/Screenshot_2024-04-24_at_8_02_58_AM_png-3196995.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/404934/Screenshot_2024-04-24_at_8_13_25_AM_png-3196996.JPG Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AKSnowRider: Originally Posted By CMiller: I'm no expert but my understanding is any access to classified information is at the discretion of the current President, and Biden made it clear immediately after he entered the office that he considered Trump a security risk and would not be giving him access to anything classified. I don't think it's considered a blanket security clearance like with any government employee. You are wrong..period.....They broke the law in order to get and carry out the subpoena... everything they did was criminal....Straight from the US court of appeals... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/404934/Screenshot_2024-04-24_at_7_59_10_AM_png-3196992.JPG https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/B8BAD4AB171DABF285258AA6005D0173/ https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/404934/Screenshot_2024-04-24_at_8_02_58_AM_png-3196995.JPG https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/404934/Screenshot_2024-04-24_at_8_13_25_AM_png-3196996.JPG Are you aware that you are basically quoting from a dissent? That's a statement of an opinion about how a previous ruling might not have been correct, it's not actually a ruling other than to say they denied the appeal to the full circuit panel. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:37:18 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By R0N: Probably not through any planning or forethought the former president is demonstrating the “banality of evil” that the current government bureaucratic class represents. It was so normalized and they were so comfortable with doing things that our system of government was designed to prevent from happening that they wrote it all down. They were probably counting on friendly judge that did not keep with the institutional norms and that would allow them to keep it all hidden. ...which is why the DC prosecution was fired up. They need that friendly judge and there are none friendlier to corrupt deep state plots than those in DC. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:37:54 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: So I just finished skimming all 315 pages, and didn’t find a single thing even remotely related to the thread title about the WH manufacturing anything. Perhaps you can point me to some of the specific pages? I did find the DOE memo you might have been referencing. Care to read aloud the first paragraph for the class? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/430926/IMG_0985-3197004.png Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: That's not the point. The point is the Jack Smith's Indictment in the documents case is all false and your precious piles of evidence is gone once the redactions were removed by Judge Canon.Here's a fun fact: In a DOE memo, redacted by Jack Smith's team, confirmed that The President maintained his Q Clearance for holding documents under their purview. Take the loss, go sit in the corner and STFU. So I just finished skimming all 315 pages, and didn’t find a single thing even remotely related to the thread title about the WH manufacturing anything. Perhaps you can point me to some of the specific pages? I did find the DOE memo you might have been referencing. Care to read aloud the first paragraph for the class? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/430926/IMG_0985-3197004.png  You have a lot of patience, I would have never spent the time to find that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:39:30 PM EDT
[#14]
One massive RICO Violation of (President Trump's) Civil Rights Under Color of Law United States Code 1983.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:39:32 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: That's not the point. The point is the Jack Smith's Indictment in the documents case is all false and your precious piles of evidence is gone once the redactions were removed by Judge Canon.Here's a fun fact: In a DOE memo, redacted by Jack Smith's team, confirmed that The President maintained his Q Clearance for holding documents under their purview. Take the loss, go sit in the corner and STFU. ...and absent impeachment and removal, an elected president's clearance *cannot* be revoked. At least not for the documents and decisions around his administration because his clearance is being elected as president. The entire case is laughable because literally all executive power is vested in the singular office of the president by the constitution. It is ludicrously absurd to insist that lower level functionaries within the executive have ANY ability to overrule the actual elected executive. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:41:12 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Here's a question for you--what process did Trump go through to secure his Q clearance? He was elected president. That's how the constitution works. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:42:55 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: I'm no expert but my understanding is any access to classified information is at the discretion of the current President No, it isn't. For the same reasons that a current congress cannot bind a future one. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:43:58 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John_Wayne777: ...and absent impeachment and removal, an elected president's clearance *cannot* be revoked. At least not for the documents and decisions around his administration because his clearance is being elected as president. The entire case is laughable because literally all executive power is vested in the singular office of the president by the constitution. It is ludicrously absurd to insist that lower level functionaries within the executive have ANY ability to overrule the actual elected executive. Dude I literally posted the memo from the dept of energy stating Trump ceased to hold a Q clearance the day he left office. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:45:33 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John_Wayne777: No, it isn't. For the same reasons that a current congress cannot bind a future one. Former presidents maintain access to classified information solely at the discretion of the current president, historically only out of precedent and courtesy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:45:52 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: What crimes? Honestly ? Didn't click OP's link. What crimes were committed? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By AKSnowRider: No, mostly it is about once more the N_T's find themselves on the wrong side of right..as has become common..9 years of wrong, and they actually thought they had him this time....turns out once more just a bunch of lies and corruption by the left trying to hide their crimes and stay in power....... What crimes? Honestly ? Didn't click OP's link. What crimes were committed? In this and nearly every other case involved, the information has been fabricated lies. These lawyers have committed Perjury at the very least. Violation of Civil Rights Under Color of Law US Code 1983 on the higher end, for which Trump should sue for punitive damages. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:47:35 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By stoner63a: When an Indictment is filed, the lawyer is swearing or affirming all information submitted is factual. In this and nearly every other case involved, the information has been fabricated lies. These lawyers have committed Perjury at the very least. Violation of Civil Rights Under Color of Law US Code 1983 on the higher end, for which Trump should sue for punitive damages. Which of the 315 pages in the unredacted document shows this? I skimmed the whole thing and didn’t see anything like that. But I might have missed it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:51:53 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Lol we already what round and round on this for 20 pages in another thread, I'm not going to bother getting back into it. I'll just say that a federal appeals panel already rejected the concept and didn't even consider it worthy of discussion. But for what it's worth I'm not aware of any claim that he ever even made a verbal order regarding this question. He's never even claimed himself that it happened, much less found anybody willing to testify to it. All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 6:56:05 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: Originally Posted By CMiller: Lol we already what round and round on this for 20 pages in another thread, I'm not going to bother getting back into it. I'll just say that a federal appeals panel already rejected the concept and didn't even consider it worthy of discussion. But for what it's worth I'm not aware of any claim that he ever even made a verbal order regarding this question. He's never even claimed himself that it happened, much less found anybody willing to testify to it. All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. Then provide a quote, lots of people claiming the unredacted documents prove all sorts of things but not one single excerpt or quote is posted anywhere by anyone making these claims |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:01:50 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: The point is that believing this is an intentional 4D chess move by Trump to get documents out in the open which he had been sitting on for four years is pretty silly. Not saying you're wrong but I believe even you know that documents presented as evidence in a court of law carry more weight then just posting them on social media. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:03:16 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John_Wayne777: He was elected president. That's how the constitution works. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John_Wayne777: Originally Posted By CMiller: Here's a question for you--what process did Trump go through to secure his Q clearance? He was elected president. That's how the constitution works. So then when he's no longer president it's no longer valid. Seems pretty simple to me. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:05:01 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By panzersergeant: Not saying you're wrong but I believe even you know that documents presented as evidence in a court of law carry more weight then just posting them on social media. Sure. I’m just chuckling at the folks hypothesizing the documents he kept were intentionally designed as part of a trap to expose all the corruption. So he did nothing with the info or documents for years, and now Trump has the “deep state” right where he wants them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:11:10 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. Well I showed your Q clearance claim to be absolutely false. Can you post a cite in support or any of your other claims? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:20:18 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Enigma102083: Then provide a quote, lots of people claiming the unredacted documents prove all sorts of things but not one single excerpt or quote is posted anywhere by anyone making these claims Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Enigma102083: Originally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: Originally Posted By CMiller: Lol we already what round and round on this for 20 pages in another thread, I'm not going to bother getting back into it. I'll just say that a federal appeals panel already rejected the concept and didn't even consider it worthy of discussion. But for what it's worth I'm not aware of any claim that he ever even made a verbal order regarding this question. He's never even claimed himself that it happened, much less found anybody willing to testify to it. All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. Then provide a quote, lots of people claiming the unredacted documents prove all sorts of things but not one single excerpt or quote is posted anywhere by anyone making these claims  Biden BUSTED Orchestrating Trump Charges in UNREDACTED Court Records 25:23 -27:35 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:21:12 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Sure. I’m just chuckling at the folks hypothesizing the documents he kept were intentionally designed as part of a trap to expose all the corruption. So he did nothing with the info or documents for years, and now Trump has the “deep state” right where he wants them. I'm thinking more like he was holding onto them trying to figure a way to use them against his enemies in a meaningful way. The judge uncovering what the prosecutor was trying to hide is just pure serendipity. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:21:14 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John_Wayne777: I mean by the letter of the law, yes. But federal prosecutors are very much used to not doing that and paying no penalty. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By John_Wayne777: Originally Posted By sixnine: Do you know what discovery is? Do you understand they have a duty to turn over all evidence that may be exculpatory? I mean by the letter of the law, yes. But federal prosecutors are very much used to not doing that and paying no penalty. Very true. Shocked any judge actually made them disclose. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:21:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Well I showed your Q clearance claim to be absolutely false. Can you post a cite in support or any of your other claims? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: All of this is a provable lie in the unredacted indictment that has been released with the last twenty-four hours. Well I showed your Q clearance claim to be absolutely false. Can you post a cite in support or any of your other claims? Wrong memo - did you do that on purpose? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:21:52 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: So I just finished skimming all 315 pages, and didn’t find a single thing even remotely related to the thread title about the WH manufacturing anything. Perhaps you can point me to some of the specific pages? I did find the DOE memo you might have been referencing. Care to read aloud the first paragraph for the class? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/430926/IMG_0985-3197004.png Why was it signed the end of June 2023? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:24:48 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: Wrong memo - did you do that on purpose? By all means, post the DOE memo showing Trump had an active Q clearance post-presidency. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:28:25 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Well I showed your Q clearance claim to be absolutely false. Can you post a cite in support or any of your other claims? Where did you show that? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:28:51 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Well I showed your Q clearance claim to be absolutely false. Can you post a cite in support or any of your other claims? So they retroactively revoked his clearance in 2023. Up until that point it was still active. That’s what you posted right. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:29:55 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BB: Where did you show that? Post #8 of this page. The DOE general council, in no uncertain terms, affirmed Trump ceased to hold a Q clearance the day he left office. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:30:16 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: By all means, post the DOE memo showing Trump had an active Q clearance post-presidency. That’s as stupid as saying when did you stop beating your wife. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:31:56 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Post #8 of this page. The DOE general council, in no uncertain terms, affirmed Trump ceased to hold a Q clearance the day he left office. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:32:14 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By CMiller: Here's a question for you--what process did Trump go through to secure his Q clearance? What documented process did Trump sign acknowledging that he no longer had Q clearance? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:32:40 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: By all means, post the DOE memo showing Trump had an active Q clearance post-presidency. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: Wrong memo - did you do that on purpose? By all means, post the DOE memo showing Trump had an active Q clearance post-presidency. I see a memo that dates in June 2023. You do know that President Trump left office in January 2021. Lies of omission are still lies. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:35:03 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Smokey0844: So they retroactively revoked his clearance in 2023. Up until that point it was still active. That’s what you posted right. Nope. The Q clearance granted to Donald J. Trump on Feb 9, 2017, terminated, by the conditions of the original grant, upon completion of Mr. Trump’s term as President of the United States at 12:00 PM on January 20, 2021. Trump didn’t have a clearance. Some minion just forgot to update the system. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:35:47 PM EDT
[#42]
imagine that another major thread derailment from the n_t's
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:36:11 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordsOfDiscipline: I see a memo that dates in June 2023. You do know that President Trump left office in January 2021. Lies of omission are still lies. Yes, a memo from 2023 confirming that his clearance expired the day he left office. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:36:22 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MacManus: I love how all the "principled_conservatives" forget that Trump's nickname in the 80's/90's was Teflon Don. yeah, he may be a loud mouthed asshole but he is a fucking expert at stepping right up to the line and leaning way over it, so his enemies can shoot themselves in the dick trying to "get him" for it. Lol the "Teflon don" was jon gotti |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:37:25 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Brahmzy: They had to Save our Democracy (TM) Just like they "fortified" the 2020 Election. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:38:14 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Nope. The Q clearance granted to Donald J. Trump on Feb 9, 2017, terminated, by the conditions of the original grant, upon completion of Mr. Trump’s term as President of the United States at 12:00 PM on January 20, 2021. Trump didn’t have a clearance. Some minion just forgot to update the system. Then there would be a paper trail from 2021 not a letter to the issuing agency in 2023. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:38:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: BB]
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Yes, a memo from 2023 confirming that his clearance expired the day he left office. The nail in the coffin here is the document (the conditions of the original grant) stating that his clearance granted in 2017 would be revoked the day he left office. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:42:23 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Smokey0844: Then there would be a paper trail from 2021 not a letter to the issuing agency in 2023. It’s extremely likely when Trump received his Q clearance it was explicitly stated it was good until the day he left office. Just because it sounds like the system wasn’t updated when he left office, doesn’t change that. There are Air Force systems that don’t have my correct rank or duty title, as they are outdated. It doesn’t make it true though. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:43:17 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BB: The nail in the coffin here is the document (the conditions of the original grant) stating that his clearance granted in 2017 would be revoked the day he left office. Yes, exactly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/24/2024 7:46:58 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: So I just finished skimming all 315 pages, and didn’t find a single thing even remotely related to the thread title about the WH manufacturing anything. Perhaps you can point me to some of the specific pages? I did find the DOE memo you might have been referencing. Care to read aloud the first paragraph for the class? https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/430926/IMG_0985-3197004.png Imagine some douchebag at the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending your driver's license... retroactively to 2021. And then the cops show up at your door with 1095 citations for driving on a suspended license... |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
